IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/recore/v68y2012icp96-103.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Construction waste minimisation comparing conventional and precast construction (Mixed System and IBS) methods in high-rise buildings: A Malaysia case study

Author

Listed:
  • Lachimpadi, Suresh Kumar
  • Pereira, Joy Jacqueline
  • Taha, Mohd Raihan
  • Mokhtar, Mazlin

Abstract

The construction industry has always been a major generator of construction waste and is often faced with the issue of its effective management in minimising environmental pollution. This research paper focuses on the construction waste generated from the construction of high rise buildings using 3 construction methods; Conventional Construction (Category I), the Mixed System (Category II) and Industrialised Building System (IBS, Category III). The construction waste for each construction category were characterised into its mineral and non-mineral components. The construction waste usage efficiency (CWUE), waste generation, reuse and recycling rates were also calculated. The IBS (Category III) was found to be the most efficient construction method with a waste generation rate (WGR) of 0.016tons of construction waste/m2 floor space compared to the Mixed System (Category II) at 0.030tons/m2 and the Conventional Construction (Category I) at 0.048tons/m2. The construction waste usage efficiency (CWUE) was the highest in Category III (IBS) at 94.1% with only 5.9% of the total construction waste in this category being disposed at landfills. The Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) of Malaysia has recognised its benefits and has actively promoted the use of IBS in Malaysia. The waste characterisation data and its uses (reuse and recycling) obtained from this study could be used as baseline data to promote and encourage the Malaysian construction industry to adopt the use of precast technology, the Industrialised Building System (Category III) and move away from the more traditional resource hungry Conventional Construction (Category I). The inclusion of the Mixed System (Category II) in this study as an intermediate construction method was aimed at providing the link between the Conventional Construction (Category I) and the IBS (Category III). The Mixed System (Category II) incorporates both the IBS and Conventional Construction methods. The Conventional Construction (Category I) with the incorporation of new construction technologies could easily be reclassified as the Mixed System (Category II), allowing Malaysian contractors to easily adopt it. This paves the way for better understanding for the use of precast technology which eventually would result in a positive shift towards the use of the IBS (Category III) by Malaysian contractors in the future. Thus, improving the construction industry's environmental performance and commitment to sustainable development as outlined by the CIDB's Construction Industry Master Plan 2006–2015 for Malaysia.

Suggested Citation

  • Lachimpadi, Suresh Kumar & Pereira, Joy Jacqueline & Taha, Mohd Raihan & Mokhtar, Mazlin, 2012. "Construction waste minimisation comparing conventional and precast construction (Mixed System and IBS) methods in high-rise buildings: A Malaysia case study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 96-103.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:68:y:2012:i:c:p:96-103
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.08.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344912001498
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resconrec.2012.08.011?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Dimoudi, A. & Tompa, C., 2008. "Energy and environmental indicators related to construction of office buildings," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 53(1), pages 86-95.
    2. Begum, Rawshan Ara & Siwar, Chamhuri & Pereira, Joy Jacqueline & Jaafar, Abdul Hamid, 2006. "A benefit–cost analysis on the economic feasibility of construction waste minimisation: The case of Malaysia," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 86-98.
    3. Chun-Li Peng & Domenic Scorpio & Charles Kibert, 1997. "Strategies for successful construction and demolition waste recycling operations," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 49-58.
    4. Emery, S.B. & Smith, D.N. & Gaterell, M.R. & Sammons, G. & Moon, D., 2007. "Estimation of the recycled content of an existing construction project," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 395-409.
    5. Suocheng, Dong & Tong, Kurt W. & Yuping, Wu, 2001. "Municipal solid waste management in China: using commercial management to solve a growing problem," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 10(1), pages 7-11, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Young-Chan Kim & Yuan-Long Zhang & Won-Jun Park & Gi-Wook Cha & Jung-Wan Kim & Won-Hwa Hong, 2019. "Analysis of Waste Generation Characteristics during New Apartment Construction—Considering the Construction Phase," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-15, September.
    2. Lanfang, Liu & Issam, Srour & Chong, Wai K. & Christopher, Hermreck, 2015. "Integrating G2G, C2C and resource flow analysis into life cycle assessment framework: A case of construction steel’s resource loop," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 143-152.
    3. Gangolells, Marta & Casals, Miquel & Forcada, Núria & Macarulla, Marcel, 2014. "Analysis of the implementation of effective waste management practices in construction projects and sites," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 99-111.
    4. López-Guerrero, Rafael E. & Vera, Sergio & Carpio, Manuel, 2022. "A quantitative and qualitative evaluation of the sustainability of industrialised building systems: A bibliographic review and analysis of case studies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    5. Esa, Mohd Reza & Halog, Anthony & Rigamonti, Lucia, 2017. "Strategies for minimizing construction and demolition wastes in Malaysia," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 219-229.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Yuan, H.P. & Shen, L.Y. & Hao, Jane J.L. & Lu, W.S., 2011. "A model for cost–benefit analysis of construction and demolition waste management throughout the waste chain," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(6), pages 604-612.
    2. Lu, Weisheng & Yuan, Hongping, 2010. "Exploring critical success factors for waste management in construction projects of China," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 201-208.
    3. Ajayi, Saheed O. & Oyedele, Lukumon O. & Bilal, Muhammad & Akinade, Olugbenga O. & Alaka, Hafiz A. & Owolabi, Hakeem A. & Kadiri, Kabir O., 2015. "Waste effectiveness of the construction industry: Understanding the impediments and requisites for improvements," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 101-112.
    4. Wang, Jiayuan & Yuan, Hongping & Kang, Xiangping & Lu, Weisheng, 2010. "Critical success factors for on-site sorting of construction waste: A china study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 54(11), pages 931-936.
    5. Noushin Islam & Malindu Sandanayake & Shobha Muthukumaran & Dimuth Navaratna, 2024. "Review on Sustainable Construction and Demolition Waste Management—Challenges and Research Prospects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-30, April.
    6. Stua, Michele, 2013. "Evidence of the clean development mechanism impact on the Chinese electric power system's low-carbon transition," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 1309-1319.
    7. Abbate, Stefano & Centobelli, Piera & Cerchione, Roberto, 2023. "From Fast to Slow: An Exploratory Analysis of Circular Business Models in the Italian Apparel Industry," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 260(C).
    8. Zhang, Ning & Zhang, Duo & Zuo, Jian & Miller, Travis R. & Duan, Huabo & Schiller, Georg, 2022. "Potential for CO2 mitigation and economic benefits from accelerated carbonation of construction and demolition waste," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    9. Li, Wei & Sun, Wen & Li, Guomin & Cui, Pengfei & Wu, Wen & Jin, Baihui, 2017. "Temporal and spatial heterogeneity of carbon intensity in China's construction industry," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 162-173.
    10. Qiang Du & Xinran Lu & Yi Li & Min Wu & Libiao Bai & Ming Yu, 2018. "Carbon Emissions in China’s Construction Industry: Calculations, Factors and Regions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-17, June.
    11. Udawatta, Nilupa & Zuo, Jian & Chiveralls, Keri & Zillante, George, 2015. "Improving waste management in construction projects: An Australian study," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 73-83.
    12. Esa, Mohd Reza & Halog, Anthony & Rigamonti, Lucia, 2017. "Strategies for minimizing construction and demolition wastes in Malaysia," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 219-229.
    13. Rui Wang, 2011. "Environmental and resource sustainability of Chinese cities: A review of issues, policies, practices and effects," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 35(2), pages 112-121, May.
    14. Dunant, Cyrille F. & Drewniok, Michał P. & Sansom, Michael & Corbey, Simon & Allwood, Julian M. & Cullen, Jonathan M., 2017. "Real and perceived barriers to steel reuse across the UK construction value chain," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 118-131.
    15. Reza, Bahareh & Soltani, Atousa & Ruparathna, Rajeev & Sadiq, Rehan & Hewage, Kasun, 2013. "Environmental and economic aspects of production and utilization of RDF as alternative fuel in cement plants: A case study of Metro Vancouver Waste Management," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 105-114.
    16. Wang, Li'ao & Hu, Gang & Gong, Xun & Bao, Liang, 2009. "Emission reductions potential for energy from municipal solid waste incineration in Chongqing," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 34(9), pages 2074-2079.
    17. Jaouda R. Jaouda Hamad & Marlia M. Hanafiah & Akbar John, B & Hassan I. Sheikh, 2017. "The Practice, Challenges and Awareness of Residential Solid Waste Management in the City of Al –Marj, Libya," Environment & Ecosystem Science (EES), Zibeline International Publishing, vol. 1(1), pages 23-27, January.
    18. Ariane Volk & Jana Lippelt, 2011. "Kurz zum Klima: Müllberge – eine Bedrohung nicht nur für unser Klima," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 64(19), pages 27-30, October.
    19. Qing Yang & Chen Zuo & Xingxing Liu & Zhichao Yang & Hui Zhou, 2020. "Risk Response for Municipal Solid Waste Crisis Using Ontology-Based Reasoning," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-23, May.
    20. Begum, Rawshan Ara & Siwar, Chamhuri & Pereira, Joy Jacqueline & Jaafar, Abdul Hamid, 2006. "A benefit–cost analysis on the economic feasibility of construction waste minimisation: The case of Malaysia," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 86-98.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:recore:v:68:y:2012:i:c:p:96-103. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kai Meng (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/resources-conservation-and-recycling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.